Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A misunderstanding, obviously. I strongly object the gyrojet-comparison, as the rocket motor does not engage before leaving the barrel. The projectile is fired by a conventional charge, thus reaching harmful velocity instantly instead of slowly picking up speed like the gyrojets.

I simply propose the conventional charge not having to exert as much physical force as many people seem to believe. In essence, "low velocity" being relative - subsonic speed, compared to however fast a bolter round may fly once the rocket motor has begun accelerating the projectile beyond its first stage tempo.

As I tend to mention in such discussions, I like to compare the bolter to the AA-12 shotgun, which undoubtedly is very much lethal from the muzzle. And still a normal person can dual-wield a pair of 'em. The one and only difference to a bolter is that you'd still have to add a rocket motor to the AA-12's explosive rounds.

It would stand to reason, however, that bolt weapons have a slightly stronger penetration beyond a certain minimum distance of a few meters, as a rocket motor on full speed will increase the kinetic energy beyond what the conventional charge supplied.

At least that is my interpretation, an amateur attempt at combining studio fluff with real life gun physics to provide a result that is believable enough for me.

"Low velocity" can also be a relative term. Low Velocity compared to once the rocket has gotten to full power, low velocity compared to an autocannon...

Bolters are still quite lethal at close range because of the chemical explosive stage and even more lethal at long range because the rocket has accelerated the bolt to a higher speed.

Yes, exactly. However, for the bolter round to be lethal at point-blank ranges (something gyro-weapons are not) then the bullet needs to be traveling at lethal velocities at those ranges. Even if it were a single-stage rocket, it's going to be pushing back against the weapon itself as it travels down the barrel... this would mean recoil.

I completely agree with Lynata's view. I could see the base charge, combined with the armor piercing tip, making the projectile leathal to something like 10-15 feet, and the jet ensuring it maintains lethality. Also one thing to take note of is that the firing chamber is in the middle of the weapon, just enough barrel for rifling to give it spin, and the whole back half for some form of recoil absorbtion.

DarbNilbirts wrote:and the whole back half for some form of recoil absorbtion.

Not to mention that the seemingly tremendous weight of a boltgun (judging purely from its size as well as assuming an all-metal construction now) would reduce recoil as well - one would not even be forced to look to contemporary concepts such as spring-loaded absorbers, counterweights and mercury-filled tubes or even a simple stock.

Naturally, carrying this beast will still be quite the burden, but that's just the price you gotta pay. There's a reason for why heavy bolters are nick-named "back breakers".

Also of note might be the "blast compensator" on the bolter schematic that came with the 3E rulebook, which would supposedly ... well, compensate for the blast created when discharging the gun. Given that the term is attached to a set of grills on the weapon's frame, the principle may be somewhat similar to that of a real world recoilless rifle, meaning that whoever GW guy came up with the schematic may have meant for the rearward momentum to be redirected through the grills, in turn decreasing the amount of kinetic energy exerted on the weapon and the user.

All speculation and interpretion, of course.

Bolters are overrated anyhow. Go with lasers. Better ammo capacity, recoil handling, (for a space marine with a fusion reactor, nigh infinite I'd bet), better accuracy (what sort of range do you think an Astares could get with a scaled up hellgun?) and if you design the gun right it can get the same performance (or better) as a bolter without any of the drawbacks.

Indeed, many of the BL sources mention that (some) lasguns have variable yields too. These include everything from draining the entire charge pack in one amazing blast (First and Only, blows the head off of an Iron Warrior which Gaunt's bolt pistol fails to harm) to minimum setting which barely outputs much heat at all!